RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

Elk, moose, .300 OK!! Brown Bear, .338 better, .375-.416 even better!!


" It seems very difficult to impress most reloaders with the fact that every rifle is an individual, and what proves to be a maximum load in one may be quite mild in another, and vice versa." Bob Hagel, GAME LOADS AND PRACTICAL BALLISTICS FOR THE AMERICAN HUNTER, 1977

RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

.338 Win Mag....

RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

aunsaber- I think you better re-read my question. I never said anything about taking 400-500yd shots. I' m not very comfortable shooting much past 200-250yds, let alone 500. I was simply wondering what people think is more effective, high velocity creating lots of ft/lbs, or heavier bullets with larger frontal area.

RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

Rangerlab: I know what your question is, and I commend you for setting limits that you are comfortable with.
The 400 to 500 yard shot was in referance to some other responses and what as been said on this forum in the past.
Like I said before, I don' t mean to step on anyones toes.
I' m sorry if you took it that way.

RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

aunsaber- No problem. I just didn' t want to turn this into an arguement about how guns like the 300 Ultra Mag encourage hunters to take shots longer than they should, that' s another topic alltogether.

RE: Frontal area vs. Velocity
 

.300 win mag with 200gr controlled expansion bullet like swift a frame, x bullet, partition. That would be (and is) my personal choice.

on the other hand.....

I have never hunted the big bears but believe those with experience in that area may tell you it is a big step up in power requirement from hunting moose and elk.

Maybe with a .338 you could use 210 partitions for elk and moose and then a 250 grainer for the big bears.
Just throwing out some thoughts.